Delhi District Court
State vs Yashpal Etc on 11 December, 2025
IN THE COURT OF Ms. VIJAYSHREE RATHORE, JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS-05, NEW DELHI DISTRICT, PATIALA
HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
STATE VS. Yashpal & Ors.
FIR No. : 104/2007
PS : Nangloi
U/s : 186/353/332/342/34 IPC
JUDGMENT
A. Sl. No. of the Case 71358/2016 B. Date of Commission of offence 06.02.2007 C. Date of FIR 06.02.2007 D. Date of charge-sheet 30.01.2008 E. Name of the complainant HC Lobhan Singh F. Name of the accused persons, Yashpal S/o Mr. Zabar Singh R/o
their parentage and residence H. No.97, Yadav Park Extension, Kamruddin Nagar, Nangloi, Delhi.
G. Offence complained of or 186/353/332/342/34 IPC proved H. Date of framing of charges 07.03.2013 I. Date of commencement of 11.09.2013 evidence J. Plea of the accused Not plead guilty
State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. FIR No. : 104/2007 PS Nangloi U/s 186/353/332/342/34 IPC Page no.1 of 18 K. Date on which judgment is 19.11.2025 reserved L. Final Order Conviction M. Date of Judgment 11.12.2025 Brief facts of the present case
1. The case put forth by prosecution in brief is that on 05.06.2007 HC Lobhan Singh being In-charge of PCR Van P-67, based at Ganda Nala Kamruddin Nagar, Delhi and at around 11:56 PM, he received a call regarding quarrel at H. No.E-2. When he along with Ct. Sridhar and driver Ct. Dharambir reached there, they found accused Yashpal, Sanjay (abated) and their parents Jawahar Singh and Kamesh were quarreling there and the accused persons had confined their parents and brothers in a room. When he asked them not to quarrel, accused Sanjay gave beatings to him due to which he sustained injuries near left eye and also torn his uniform and button strip. Accused Yashpal attacked on Ct. Shridhar and gave beatings him and tore his uniform. 100 number was made and thereafter, IO reached the spot and rescued them and opened the gate. FIR was registered. Site plan was prepared by IO. During investigation, the torn uniform and number plate were seized by IO vide seizure memo. Accused persons were arrested vide arrest memo and personal search mem was also conducted. Medical examination of the victims were also State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. FIR No. : 104/2007 PS Nangloi U/s 186/353/332/342/34 IPC Page no.2 of 18 conducted. Statement of witnesses were recorded. After completing the investigation, charge-sheet was filed against accused persons. Cognizance of the same was taken.
Framing of charge
2. After compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C., vide order dated 07.03.2013 charge was framed against accused Sanjay and Yashpal for the offence u/s 186/332/353/342 IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Accused Sanjay expired during the pendency of the case and proceeding qua him was abated vide order dated 18.04.2023.
Prosecution Evidence
3. In support of its case, the prosecution had examined eight witnesses. PW1/HC Lobhan Singh, PW2/SI Murari Lal, PW3 ASI Shri Dhar, PW4 ASI Suresh Chander, PW5 Retired SI Prem Singh, PW6/HC Rajesh, PW7/ASI Virender Singh and PW8/Retired ASI Bahadur Singh.
4. PW-1/HC Lobhan Singh, had deposed that on 05.06.2007, he was posted as Incharge of PCR Van, P-67, base at Ganda Nala, Kamruddin Nagar, Delhi and on that day, he was on duty along with gun man, Ct. Shri Dhar and driver Ct. Dharamvir from 08:00 PM to to 08:00 AM. He deposed that at about 11:56 PM, he received a call regarding quarrel at H. No. E-2 and when he reached there, he found accused Sanjay, Yashpal, both brothers and their parents State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. FIR No. : 104/2007 PS Nangloi U/s 186/353/332/342/34 IPC Page no.3 of 18 namely Jawhar Singh and Kamlesh quarreling there and both accused persons have confined their parents and their brothers in a room. He depposed that when he asked them not to quarrel, accused Sanjay started beating him due to which, he sustained injuries near on his left eye and also torn his uniform (shirt) and button strip. He deposed that accused Yashpal attacked on Ct. Shri Dharan and beat him and torn his uniform also, however, he managed to call at 100 number and thereafter, P-73 vehicle and IO came at the spot and got them rescued by getting opened the gate from the accused persons. He deposed that IO recorded his statement. He deposed that he handed over the torn uniform to the IO to which IO seized the same vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/B. On cross examination by Ld. APP, he deposed that accused Yashpal and Sanjay were arrested and their personal search were conducted. He deposed that they were taken to the hospital for their medical examination. The witness has correctly identified the accused and case property in the Court..During his cross examination on behalf of accused Yashpal, he deposed that he has signed his statement and exhibits. After showing the document Ex.PW1/B, witness states that there is no mentioning of seizure of under shirt, however, shirt is not torn but is only 'udhari hui hai. He deposed that his statement was recorded only once, however, he does not remember the time when it was recorded. He deposed that information was received by him through control room. He deposed that document regarding call was handed over by him to IO. He deposed that he cannot tell the time when IO reached at the spot as he was injured and did not pay heed his arrival or departure. He deposed that Ct. Shri Dharan left for PS for registration of FIR, however, he does not remember the State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. FIR No. : 104/2007 PS Nangloi U/s 186/353/332/342/34 IPC Page no.4 of 18 time of departure and arrival. He deposed that he went to the hospital along with Ct. Shri Dharan including other persons and accused by PCR van on which he was on duty. He deposed that his statement was recorded in his presence. He deposed that accused persons have not sustained injuries in his presence and he does not know how the accused persons got the injuries. On asking by doctor, he deposed that he sustained injuries on given beatings by the accused persons. He deposed that he signed the tehrir and memos, however, he does not know about their details. He deposed that all the documents and memos were prepared at the spot. He deposed that he signed the document first i.e. complaint. Rest of the suggestions have been denied by the witness. During cross examination on behalf of accused Sanjay Singh, he deposed that they used to put their arrival in the register before assigned the duty of PCR. He deposed that said register was seen by IO, however, the same was not seized in his presence. He deposed that no public person was present in the house accused persons since it was night time. He deposed that after call was made at 100 number, some public persons have gathered outside the house, however, he does not remember their number and details.
5. PW2/SI Murari Lal has deposed that he was posted at PS Nangloi and on that day, at about 3:20 PM, Ct. Rajesh brought the rukka sent by ASI Bahadur Singh, on that basis, FIR No.104/07 was registered after endorsement on rukka which is Ex.PW2/C. During cross examination, he deposed that original FIR was in original handwritten and it was reduced into print version. He deposed that he had not computerized the original handwritten records into printed ones.
State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. FIR No. : 104/2007 PS Nangloi U/s 186/353/332/342/34 IPC Page no.5 of 18 He deposed that he does not know who did the same. Rest of the suggestions have been denied by the witness.
6. PW3/ASI Shri Dhar has deposed that on 05.06.2007, he was posted as gunman on PCR van P-67 at Ganda Nala Kamaruddin Nagar, Delhi along with HC/ Incharge Lobhan Singh and Ct. Dharamvir driver of the van and at about 11.56 PM, HC Lobhan Singh received one call regarding quarrel at Shiv Ram Park, Nangloi. He deposed that thereafter, he along with HC Lobhan Singh reached at the spot i.e. H. No. E-2 where he met one Jabbar Singh and his family members and saw that his sons Sanjay and Yashpal, both brothers were assaulting and beating their parents and he along with HC Lobhan tried to pacify the situation but both accused persons started beating them. He deposed that both of them closed the door of the house and they got confined in their house and sustained injuries below his left eye and HC Lobhan also received injuries on his face. He deposed that in the meantime HC Lobhan called 100 number, one other PCR van along with the IO/ASI Bahadur Singh came from PS and after making efforts opened the door of the house. He deposed that IO got the medical examination of himself, HC Lobhan Singh, Jabbar Singh and his family members in Sanjay Gandhi Hospital and thereafter, IO got registered the present case on the statement of HC Lobhan Singh. He deposed that IO also seized the police uniform of himself and HC Lobhan which was torn by both the accused persons during the scuffle. He deposed that after interrogation, accused persons were arrested and conducted their personal search. He deposed that his statement was recorded by the IO. The witness has correctly identified State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. FIR No. : 104/2007 PS Nangloi U/s 186/353/332/342/34 IPC Page no.6 of 18 the accused persons and case property in the Court. During cross examination, witness has deposed that during scuffle, accused Sanjay torn uniform of HC Lobhan Singh and accused Yashpal attacked and beat him. He deposed that family members of accused sustained injuries in the incident, however, he cannot tell their names and nature of injuries. He further deposed that accused persons did not sustain injuries during scuffle. He deposed that he cannot tell the exact time as to what time ASI Bahadur Singh reached the spot. He deposed that IO recorded the statement of HC Lobhan Singh in his own writing and sent one constable for registration of FIR, however, he does not remember his name today. He deposed that IO prepared site plan at the instance of HC Lobhan Singh and seized both the torn uniforms. He deposed that IO interrogated both the accused persons and arrested them. He along with HC Lobha Singh taken to the hospital for medical examination by IO. He deposed that accused persons were not present at the hospital when their medical examination was being conducted. He deposed that he cannot tell the time when the constable returned to the spot after got registration of FIR. He deposed that he never visited the spot with the IO after the day of incident. Rest of the suggestion have been denied by the witness.
8. PW4/Retired ASI Suresh Chander had deposed that on 05.02.2007 he was posted as HC at West Zone PCR and on on that day, an information was received through PCR call regarding quarrel with the staff members of power 65, who were already ending a PCR call nearby H. No. 97 nearby Tittoo diary Kanwar Singh Nagar. He deposed that on this information, he along with other State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. FIR No. : 104/2007 PS Nangloi U/s 186/353/332/342/34 IPC Page no.7 of 18 staff members reached at the aforesaid place of incident where it was revealed that the staff members of power 65 were confined in house no.97 and the said house was locked from the outside. He deposed that the bolt of said house was opened and the officials namely Ct. Sridhar and HC Lobhan Singh were got released and at that time, accused Yashpal, accused Sanjay (since PO) along with their father and two others were present in the house. The witness has correctly identified the accused in the Court. He deposed that the accused Yashpal with his brother Sanjay gave beatings to his father and two others and in the meantime, ASI Bahadur Singh (IO) along with, staff members came at the spot and at his direction, the father of accused with two others who were injured in conditions were taken at Sanjay Gandhi Hospital. He deposed that after admitting in the hospital, he returned to his duty place. During his cross examination, he deposed that his statement was recorded by IO at the spot. He deposed that he does not remember the time when his statement was recorded. He deposed that he reached the spot 12:15 AM and remained there till arrival of IO. He left the spot for SGM Hospital at around 12:22 or 12:25 AM. He deposed that he did not return at the spot afterwards. Rest of the suggestion have been denied by the witness.
9. PW5/Retired SI Prem Singh has deposed that on 05.02.2007, he was posted as ASI and performing his duty of DO and on that day at around 11:55 PM, an information was received regarding quarrel at Kunwar Singh Nagar E-
2. Titto Dairy, Nilothi Mor, Nangioi. The said information was reduced into writing in register no. 2 Part A at serial no. 36 and thereafter the information State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. FIR No. : 104/2007 PS Nangloi U/s 186/353/332/342/34 IPC Page no.8 of 18 was given to ASI Bahadur Singh through Ct. Shribhagwan vide DD entry. He deposed that he has brought the order whereby the record for the abovesaid period has been destroyed. During his cross examination, he deposed that his duty hours from 4:00 PM to 12:00 midnight. He was discharged from his duty on the alleged date after about 12-15 minutes of 12:00 midnight. He deposed that no FIR was registered during the aforesaid time period.
10. PW6/HC Rajesh had deposed that on 05.02.2007, he was posted at PS Nangloi as Constable and on intervening night of 05/06.02.2007, he was directed to perform night duty along with IO ASI Bhadur Singh and at about 12:00 mid night, an information was received regarding quarrel with the police staff at E-2 Block. Kanwar Singh Nagar and on this information, he along with IO reached at the aforesaid place of incident where person namely Lobhan Singh was already present along with one another staff member namely Ct. Shridhar. He deposed that while they were attending a PCR call in the area i.e. E-2 block, the accused persons namely Yashpal (present in the court correctly identified by the witness) and Sanjay (since PO) had committed quarrel with them. He deposed that initially, the injured i.e. complainant along with the accused persons were taken at Sanjay Gandhi Hospital at the direction of IO for their medical examination and after that he returned at the spot where the MLC of injured / complainant and the injured Yashpal was handed over to the IO. He deposed that thereafter, IO recorded the statement of complainant whereupon he had prepared rukka/tehrir and the same was handed over to him for the registration of FIR, he got the FIR registered and returned to the spot along State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. FIR No. : 104/2007 PS Nangloi U/s 186/353/332/342/34 IPC Page no.9 of 18 with copy of FIR and original rukka and handed over to the IO. He deposed that IO had seized the uniform of the complainant and Ct. Shridhar vide seizure memo Ex. PW1/B. He deposed that site plan was prepared by IO and thereafter, accused was arrested and their personal search was also conducted. He deposed that after completion of proceedings, both accused persons were taken to the PS from where they were put behind the bars on directions of Court. He deposed that case property was deposited with malkhana and his statement was recorded by the IO. The witness has correctly identified the accused and case property in the Court. During his cross examination, he deposed that he reached at the spot within 10 minutes where complainant, Ct. shridhar, accused Yashpal and Sanjay were found as the accused persons were nabbed by the said officials i.e. complainant and Ct. Sridhar. He deposed that no other persons met them at the spot. He deposed that they were taken to the hospital via PCR van at around 2:00 AM and he returned from hospital at around 2:30 AM after getting their medical examination. He deposed that he left the spot at 3:00 AM for registration of FIR and returned to the spot after getting the FIR registered by another TSR. He deposed that he does not remember when seizure memo was prepared by the IO, however, clothes were seized by the IO before registration of FIR. He deposed that IO prepared the site plan and inquired about the facts and circumstances under which the incident had taken place. Rest of the suggestions have been denied by the witness.
11. PW7/ASI Virender Singh has deposed that he was working in PCR West Zone since last one year. The witness has proved the destruction of the record State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. FIR No. : 104/2007 PS Nangloi U/s 186/353/332/342/34 IPC Page no.10 of 18 CPCR/PCR dated 05.08.2022. He deposed that vide the said order, the record pertaining till date 31.12.2021 has been destroyed. During his cross examination, he deposed that order dated 05.08.2022 is merely a proposal to destroy the record till 31.12.2021. He further deposed that he is not the witness of destruction.
12. PW8/Retired ASI Bahadur Singh has deposed that on 05/06.02.2007, he was on night emergency duty with Ct. Shri Bhagwan and on receipt of DD No. 36A, he along with Ct. Shri Bhagwan reached at E-2, Kunwar Singh Nangloi, Delhi where they met HC Lobhan Singh along with Ct. Shridhar in torn uniform and they also found damage PCR vehicle at the spot. He deposed that HC Lobhan singh was the in-charge of PCR who produced accused Yashpal & Titoo before him. He deposed that they also found another damaged PCR at the spot along with the Incharge of the PCR van and his staff. He deposed that he recorded the statement of HC Lobhan Singh and thereafter, they took the accused persons along with HC Lobhan, Ct. Shridhar and other staff for medical examination at SGM Hospital where he collected the MLC of injured as well as accused persons. He deposed that he prepared Tehrir and handed over to Ct. Shribhagwan for registration of FIR, accordingly Ct. Shri Bhagwan went to the PS for registration of FIR and got the FIR registered. He deposed that he along with the injured staff and accused persons left the hospital and went to the spot where he seized the torn uniform of the complainant HC Lobhan Singh and Ct. Shridahr, after putting it in one white cloth and sealed the same with the seal of BS. He deposed that in the meantime Ct. Shribhagwan State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. FIR No. : 104/2007 PS Nangloi U/s 186/353/332/342/34 IPC Page no.11 of 18 reached at the spot. Thereafter, both the accused persons i.e. Yashpal & Sanjay @ Titoo were arrested at the instance of HC Lobhan Singh and also recorded the statement of witnesses. He deposed that accused persons were released on bail and the case property was deposited in Malkhana. He deposed that during the investigation, he collected the duty roster of PCR night duty. He deposed that after completion of investigation, charge sheet prepared and filed before the Court. The witness has correctly identified the accused and case property in the Court. During cross examination, he deposed that he had filed on record the DD No. 36A which shows that he was on night duty in intervening night 5/6- 02-2007. He deposed that they reached at the spot between 11-12 midnight by motorcycle, however, logbook of the motorcycle has not been filed. He deposed that when he reached at the spot, he found two PCR vehicles i.e. PCR- 65 and PCR-71. He deposed that he went to hospital on his motorcycle and other persons reached in both the PCR. He deposed that he does not remember when he reached the spot from hospital. He deposed that in the absence of Ct. Shribhagwan, he had prepared the seizure Memo of case property and recorded the statement of the witnesses and also prepared the site plan. Rest of the suggestions have been denied by the witness.
Statement of accused
12. The examination of accused Yashpal u/s 313 r/w 281 Cr.P.C. was recorded on 22.09.2025 in which he stated that he is innocent and falsely implicated in the case. He submits that no such incident ever took place and he State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. FIR No. : 104/2007 PS Nangloi U/s 186/353/332/342/34 IPC Page no.12 of 18 does not know why the present case was registered against him.
13. Accused did not lead defence evidence. Thereafter matter was fixed for final arguments.
14. Final arguments addressed by the Ld. APP for State and Ld. Counsel for accused were heard and case file was perused.
15. It is argued by Ld. APP for the State that accused is identified by all witnesses in the case. The torn uniform of Ct. Shridhar and damaged name plate is also recovered in the present case. There is no contradiction in the testimony of any witnesses. No probable defense had been raised by the accused.
16. It is argued on behalf of accused that accused is falsely implicated in the present case and no MLC of HC Lobhan Singh or of Ct. Sridhar is placed on record to show that accused had given beatings to them. The entire case is fabricated. Thus, benefit of doubt must be given to accused.
17. Section 186 IPC provides punishment for 'obstructing public servant in discharge of public function'. In the said provision the expression whoever voluntarily obstructs any public servant in discharge of his public function is used. The word 'obstruction' is not confined to physical obstruction. It need not be an act of criminal force. The act need not be a violent one. It is enough if State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. FIR No. : 104/2007 PS Nangloi U/s 186/353/332/342/34 IPC Page no.13 of 18 the act complained of results in preventing a public servant in discharge of his lawful duties. Any act of causing impediment by unlawfully preventing public servant in discharge of his functions would be enough to attract section 186 IPC. In the case of State v. Babulal Gaurishanker Misar, AIR 1957 Bom10 , it was held that to constitute 'obstruction' within sec 186 it is not necessary that there should be actual criminal force. It is sufficient if there is either a show of force or threat or any act preventing the execution go the process of the civil court.
18. Section 353 IPC is a distinct offence and prescribes punishment for using assault or criminal force to any person being a public servant in execution of his duty in order to deter public servant from discharging their official duties. Section 332 IPC prescribes punishment for causing hurt to deter public servant from his duty.
19. There is certain precondition attached with prosecution of section 186 IPC. U/s 195(1)(a) CrPC there is an express bar for the court to take cognizance of offence punishable u/s section 186 IPC and provides that there shall be a complaint made in writing by the public servant or by any other public servant to who he is subordinate. In Makardhwaj v. State AIR 1954 Orissa 175, it had been held that "noncompliance of the requirements of section 195 CrPC is fatal to the prosecution for offence punishable u/s 186 IPC." In the present case, the accused had admitted the sanction / complaint under Section 195 Ex.AD-5. Since the complaint is admitted, as such, the compliance of section 195 IPC is State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. FIR No. : 104/2007 PS Nangloi U/s 186/353/332/342/34 IPC Page no.14 of 18 met with in the present case.
20. The identity of accused in undisputed in the present case. All the prosecution witnesses had correctly identified the accused Yashpal as the one who had given beatings to Ct. Sridhar as well as HC Lobhan Singh.
21. PW1/HC Lobhan Singh as well as PW3 ASI Sridhar are the most material witness of the prosecution case as they are the victims of offence and entire case rest upon his testimony. I have carefully perused the testimony of the complainant as well as his complaint Ex. PW1/A. A careful perusal of the testimony of complainant had remained unimpeached and uncontroverted despite extensive grilling in cross examination. In his testimony PW1 HC Lobhan Singh had narrated the entire incident. As per the his version on the date of incident dated 05.06.2007 at about 11:56 PM, when he received a call quarrel at H .No.E-2, he along with Ct. Sridhar and driver Ct. Dharambir reached there and found the accused Yashpal and Sanjay and their parents Jawahar Singh and Kamlesh quarelling there and both the persons had confined their parents and their brothers in a room. When he asked them not to quarrel, accused Sanjay started beating him. Further, accused Yashpal attacked Ct. Sridhar and gave beatings to him also tore his uniform. He has also specifically deposed that accused Yashpal slapped him number of times on his face and both the accused persons also hit Ct. Sridhar. They also torn his uniform and under shirt wearing at that time. There appears no contradiction in the testimony of PW1 HC Lobhan Singh. PW3 ASI Sridhar who is also the victim State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. FIR No. : 104/2007 PS Nangloi U/s 186/353/332/342/34 IPC Page no.15 of 18 of the incident had also supported the entire version of PW1 HC Lobhan singh. Their testimony had also been consistent throughout that accused has given beatings to HC Lobhan Singh and Ct. Sridhar.
22. It is the contention of Ld. counsel for accused that PW HC Lobhan Singh had admitted in his cross examination that the cloths of shirt was not torn. He admitted that it was only 'udhri hui hai'. In this regard, it is worth mentioning that when the case property was produced before the Court, it was court observations that stitches of shirt of constable from the left side through armpit was extended from hip portion to the upper portion up to the arm being unstitched. The stitches of the right arm is unstitched to the extent that only minor attachment was there between the arm and the main shirt. Further, the pocket of the shirt was also unstitched from one side and some of the beats were also torn / damaged. This observation shows that the cloths of HC Lobhan Singh was actually torn in the fight. It cannot be merely stated that the cloth was 'udhiri hui hai'. The very fact that PW1 /HC Lobhan and PW3 ASI Shridhar had gone to the spot i.e. H. No.E-2 on receiving call regarding quarrel at Shiv Park Nangloi while being on duty shows that they were acting in in discharge of their duty at the time of alleged offence.
23. It is also clear from the record that when HC Lobhan Singh and ASI Sridhar came to pacify the quarrel to the spot, accused persons gave beatings to them and they also closed the door and confined them in the house. Further, it is also evident from the testimony of both the witnesses that they State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. FIR No. : 104/2007 PS Nangloi U/s 186/353/332/342/34 IPC Page no.16 of 18 sustained injuries in the incident. All the witnesses had consistently deposed in this regard. The MLC of the victims Ex.AB-1 to Ex.AB-7 are admitted by the accused in proceedings under Section 294 Cr.P.C. However their version remained inconsistent in the cross examination that they were giving beatings by the accused. MLC of PW HC Lobhan and Ct. Sridhar is also on record to suggest that they had received injury though simple in nature. There is further nothing on record to assume that those injury are self inflicted in nature. Thus the factum of causing hurt to PW HC Lobhan and Ct. Sridhar had also remained uncontroverted.
24. The plea of defense of accused in his statement u/s 313 CrPC is that he is falsely implicated in the case. Accused had not examined any defense witness in this regard. There is no reason on record why accused would be falsely implicated. Thus the plea of accused also seems improbable.
25. It is well settled that in a criminal trial the burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Any contradiction or iota of proof in favour of accused persons can completely dismantle the case of prosecution. In the present case there are cogent material available on record to suggest that accused Yashpal had assaulted and caused hurt to Ct. Shri Dhar and HC Lobhan while he was discharging his lawful duty. Therefore, he had also obstructed the public servant in discharging his lawful duty.
State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. FIR No. : 104/2007 PS Nangloi U/s 186/353/332/342/34 IPC Page no.17 of 18 Conclusion & Decision
26. In these circumstances and in view of the aforementioned discussion, I hold that the prosecution has successfully proved its case against the accused Yashpal beyond all reasonable doubts. Accused Yashpal is accordingly convicted for offence u/s 186/332/353/342/34 IPC. Accused shall be heard in the point of sentencing separately. VIJAYSHREE by Digitally signed VIJAYSHREE RATHORE RATHORE Date: 2025.12.11 17:17:59 +0530 Announced in the open court (VIJAYSHREE RATHORE) In Delhi on 11.12.2025 JMFC-05/PHC, New Delhi/11.12.2025 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. FIR No. : 104/2007 PS Nangloi U/s 186/353/332/342/34 IPC Page no.18 of 18